The International Cessna^® 170 Association

Folks ,

I’ve read most of the posts on this forum that come up under an “engine monitor” search, including the fuel flow discussion.

My O300A is in rebuild as we speak and I have gotten quotes on the install of the Electronics International CGR 30P. The prices including install are in the $7700-8000 range.

With out getting into all the details how many folks have installed engine monitors vs. not. I can do a lot of flying and ADSB work for that kind of money, but having detailed engine info in the cockpit and downloadable sounds like a prudent thing when trying to maximize safety in single engine ops. I’m thinking that this info will help with the break in period but is it really needed?

On the fence looking for inputs. Thanks!

I'll come straight out and say, it is not needed.

I agree, it’s unnecessary. If an O-300A had fuel injection, a 6 cylinder engine monitor would make sense, especially on an aircraft flown long distances in cruise. But it doesn’t and the mixture distribution and cylinder cooling of an O-300A is rather primitive compared to more modern, tighter cowled engines. You can’t lean it with the precision of a fuel injected engine but leaning by ear (max noise) and tach (max rpm) does more than an adequate job to get max performance and engine life.

Well......ok it's not needed but although there's bliss in not knowing exactly what's happening up front, sometimes it's nice to know what is normal for your engine. So I think the monitor you're considering is way over the top for a 0-300 but I would go for the much simpler EI- ub16 if I could find one, especially a good used one.

Robert Timm and John Cook didn't need one. http://www.countyairports.org/History/H ... light.html

I installed one on my 52 170B. Totally happy with fuel flow, temperatures, and pressures known not guessed. Expensive but great peace of mind.

Hard for me to justify an installation which represents 20 percent of the value of the airplane. Now if our 170's were worth $150,000 then it would be a no brainier. i do like my fuel totalizator when I am making numerous flights between adding fuel.

Tim

While thats a little expensive [$7000 to $8000] but there are alternatives put out by EI which do most of the required work . For example a 6 prob CHT gauge and a fuel flow computer and a seperate EI gauge for oil pressure and temperature . Thats about $2500 for a piece of mind . Thats what i started out doing and while it worked for me i ended up with a range of digital instruments from EI fitted due to gifts from different aviation suppliers . Found EI instruments very easy to fit and understand .

Gents,

Thanks for the sage advise. My time in SE Recips is limited and I work in a world where there is never too much technology to solve any problem... I do enjoy the simplicity of flying a well designed and well maintained machine. Here's to more flying and less worry ... blue skies to all. Wish I could make it to Cody this year. Maybe next year.

I installed a CGR-30P in my 170B when I overhauled the Engine last year. It’s great. It really depend on what you like personally. Is it needed? No. If you are a person that likes to know what is going on up there then it is great. I really like the fuel flow data. Fuel calculations and remaining fuel combined with GPS data is cool. CHT’s are all over the board so don’t expect to have consistent CHT’s across the cylinders. I still lean by sound and RPM even though the CGR has advanced leaning functions.

Some things I don’t like are the screen is hard to read with polarized sun glasses. With any digital display, you must train your eyes on the numbers which requires a bit more effort. I miss being able to glance at a needle out of the corner of my eye when I scan the panel. Also when shutting down the Hobbs meter is not displayed. Sometimes I have to power back up if I want to write down the time.

Nippaero,

All good points. In fact since I plan to instruct family and friends in 94D I was planning to keep the original tac inplace. Here is my my panel. I agree with the value an analog tac brings in providing at a glance trend info. I had not thought of the post shut down tac time issue.

I would plan to put the EI instrument where my clock is now on the co-op lot side.

Nice panel!

JSwift wrote:Nippaero,

All good points. In fact since I plan to instruct family and friends in 94D I was planning to keep the original tac inplace. Here is my my panel. I agree with the value an analog tac brings in providing at a glance trend info. I had not thought of the post shut down tac time issue.

I would plan to put the EI instrument where my clock is now on the co-op lot side.

JS Very nice panel, whose glare shield do you have?

John,

Near as I can tell the glare shield must have been updated in 1990 when the “Avionic Research International” custom instrument panel was installed by the owner at that time. Thanks.

Like others have said, an engine monitor is not necessary but neither is a moving map GPS or passenger seats for that matter, they are just nice to have depending on what you do with the airplane.

Fuel flow computers are another item I want on any plane I fly, anxiety level goes way down on max range flights. The EI FP-5 is a great system and is very simple to operate.

Some electronic tachs besides giving accurate rpm indication with no error will also give good troubleshooting info. The Horizon P1000 tells you if there is an ignition problem such as bad mag or ignition switch.

A 6-position EGT/CHT will give lots of information that is not there otherwise. Problems can be narrowed to the offending cylinder (plug wires, stuck valves, bad baffle seals, etc), reducing shop time in troubleshooting. Trends can be noted over time giving early notice of impending problems.

I like independent instruments as long as there is enough panel space for all of them.

The EI UBG-16 is a very dependable unit. I have 3 of them on different airplanes and would install another one if I ever got another plane.